Anyone using

Jim Holland mailscanner at
Tue Sep 5 11:33:10 IST 2006

On Mon, 4 Sep 2006, John Rudd wrote:

> I honestly can't think of any reason you _would_ use MS's RBL facility. 
>   It's as absolute as doing the RBL entry in the MTA, yet doesn't get 
> the advantage of rejecting the message during the SMTP transaction.  It 
> doesn't offer me any flexibility over using RBL+access_db+delay_checks. 
>   What's the point?  (it's the one feature of MS whose point I've never 
> understood)

I for one certainly appreciate the option to use MS's RBL facility
togehter with whitelisting.  My view is that using RBLs at MTA level is
too drastic - I just use my own limited blacklist of systems that are
beyond the pale.  The benefit of MS versus MTA is that the mail is
quarantined so can be released if the RBLs have got it wrong.  We
regularly find a local domain gets on some blacklist, and can then just
run a script to release all the mail from them in quarantine.

I agree with those suggesting using RBLs in SpamAssassin, but as the
current server doesn't have the horsepower to run SpamAssassin, I don't
have that option.


Jim Holland
System Administrator
MANGO - Zimbabwe's non-profit e-mail service

More information about the MailScanner mailing list